Writing inThe Guardian about the Chilcot report on Tony Blair’s decision to be George W. Bush’s toadie in the invasion and occupation of Iraq, whistleblower Katherine Gun zeroes in on some questions that still remain for her:
Back in early 2003, Tony Blair was keen to secure UN backing for a resolution that would authorise the use of force against Iraq. I was a linguist and analyst at GCHQ when, on 31 Jan 2003, I, along with dozens of others in GCHQ, received an email from a senior official at the National Security Agency. It said the agency was “mounting a surge particularly directed at the UN security council (UNSC) members”, and that it wanted “the whole gamut of information that could give US policymakers an edge in obtaining results favourable to US goals or to head off surprises”.
In other words, the US planned to use intercepted communications of the security council delegates. [...]
I was furious when I read that email and leaked it. Soon afterwards, when the Observer ran a front-page story: “US dirty tricks to win vote on Iraq war”, I confessed to the leak and was arrested on suspicion of the breach of section 1 of the Official Secrets Act. I pleaded not guilty and, assisted by Liberty and Ben Emmerson QC, offered a defence of necessity – in other words, a breach of the law in order to prevent imminent loss of human life. This defence had not and, to my knowledge, has still not, been tested in a court of law. [...]
We know a lot more now than we knew before, but what about the email I leaked? Who did the NSA talk to in the UK to OK it? Did it talk to anyone? How did an NSA official feel bold enough to write to UK civil servants anticipating their cooperation in an attempt to undermine the UN’s diplomatic processes, in a secret effort to garner information to secure “results favourable to US goals”? How far did the surveillance operation proceed? Whose communications did they intercept and record? What, if anything did they discover and did they use any information they may have gathered? Was this email sent to other organisation or agencies besides GCHQ? It seems reasonable to ask why this crucial information was not included in the Chilcot inquiry.
TOP COMMENTS
TWEET OF THE DAY
BLAST FROM THE PAST
At Daily Kos on this date in 2007—Our Good Friend:
How do you mark the beginning of Islamic extremism? There are any number of denominational schisms, publications, and incidents that might be pointed out. However, if you read the works of Iranian Nobel Prize winner, Shirin Ebadi, she frequently points to Operation Ajax as the event that boosted the fundamentalists from a laughable sideshow, into a viable and rapidly growing faction.
Though it's oddly missing from US history books, Operation Ajax was the successful CIA-supported overthrow of the popular, Prime Minister of Iran and his replacement by the Shah:
Iranians were hired to protest Mossadegh and fight pro-Mossadegh demonstrators. Anti- and pro-monarchy protesters violently clashed in the streets, leaving almost three hundred dead. The operation was successful in triggering a coup, and within days, pro-Shah tanks stormed the capital and bombarded the Prime Minister's residence.
The US wanted the Shah in power because they feared Iran might "go communist," and the saw the Shaw as more reliablely "pro-western." The UK wanted the prime minister replaced because they wanted back into the Iranian oil fields. The code word to start the operation was broadcast on the BBC. The Shah was Our Good Friend.
On today's Kagro in the Morning show: Third day in a row under the cloud of a shooting. Trump camp puts on a clinic of crazy: attacking GOP Senators, Ivanka for VP & maybe The Donald will just skip the whole thing. Sign of the times: the booming active shooter countermeasures industry.
On iTunes | On YouTube | On Stitcher | Support the show: Patreon; PayPal; PayPal Subscription